Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 25th Mar 2013 21:09 UTC
Legal Late last week, Nokia dropped what many consider to be a bomb on the WebM project: a list of patents that VP8 supposedly infringes in the form of an IETF IPR declaration. The list has made the rounds around the web, often reported as proof that VP8 infringes upon Nokia's patents. All this stuff rang a bell. Haven't we been here before? Yup, we have, with another open source codec called Opus. Qualcomm and Huawei made the same claims as Nokia did, but they turned out to be complete bogus. As it turns out, this is standard practice in the dirty business of the patent licensing industry.
Permalink for comment 556685
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[4]: Big picture...
by galvanash on Tue 26th Mar 2013 14:21 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Big picture..."
Member since:

In a comparison done in May 2011, the libvpx encoder was found to be slow compared to common H.264 encoders and used up to 213% more data for the same quality video, when used in videoconferencing applications.

over twice as much data! So obviously it is not as good.

I won't argue that you are completely wrong - in best case scenerio tests for VP8 and h.264 I find both codecs are within sptting distance from each other in most measurable metrics, but VP8 loses more battles than it wins.

However, your example is ridiculous. Videoconferencing??? You pick a scenario that h.264 was specifically designed for (low resolution, extremely low bitrate, realtime encoding) and because it is better at that you say VP8 is "obviously it is not as good".

Sorry, but there is nothing obvious about that. You cannot pick one edge comparison and make such a broad generalization.

Again, I am not saying VP8 is better than h.264. I will say that for resolutions and bitrates routinely used for web based video distribution (720p and 480p, 500-1200kpbs) it is definitely close enough in most measurable metrics that most people would not notice the difference.

Besides, frankly I think arguments on the technical merits of VP8 are wasted breathe (for or against). No one uses VP8 because it is technically superior - they use it because it is open and royalty free. The fact that it is actually comparable to h.264 when used for its target use case (web video) is just icing on the cake.

Edited 2013-03-26 14:22 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3